Had a ex-friend who went real hard last year about feeling his masculinity has been challenged. Went deep into the manosphere language. He was extra annoying. Every convo was about how he, a white man in America, was being repressed. He started labelling random shit as masculine/feminine. Got sick this and stopped inviting him.
A few months later, I learned the divorce was finalized and he's been sending me invites to hang with him in his bachelor pad. Nah dog you suck now.
yeah and i bet that shit was the reason for the divorce. i got a friend who lost her husband down the right wing rabbithole and now she's processing the grief of losing someone she loved to something so goddamn stupid
This could have been me. For the longest time I was watching right wing YT channels without really realizing it because they were hiding their messaging well under legitimate critique of the movies and shows I was no longer enjoying. My girlfriend and I got into multiple arguments over this and I could tell that this was something we'd never agree on, which makes sense of course. Eventually I managed to pull myself out by unsubscribing from these channels ocne the messaging became a lot more clear (around 2021, you can probably guess why) and since then things have been much better between us and in general.
It’s also very likely the divorce was the reason for the behavior. Getting lost in the sauce of that nonsense is a tragic but not unreasonable reaction to the trauma of divorce, or just being hurt by a woman. That ideology and the people who make money from it prey on weak, lost men for a reason. Thats what its designed to do.
I bet that is really fucked up because you might spend a long, long time trying to convince yourself that he would change back or just be less of an asshole. That's a special sort of grief where they are still living but you're mourning who they used to be.
had ex-friend
B-b-but ToLeRaNcE!!!
Similar situation here (there is more than one situation, ofc), but wifey's along for the ride too, and not in a trad wife way (they're late 60s in age). Left them out of the pals' xmas dinner because it's become unbearable for everyone else.
It's no fun losing decades-long relationships over whatever "this" is that's happening.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
What’s weird about this broader “conversation” on masculinity is I feel more masculine than ever, despite not giving a flying fuck about any of this.
I never really struggled with it except as a teen, but the older I get the less I care.
—
I still say we made a mistake with communicating to men about feminism. We kind of left people who are terrible like Andrew Tate to dominate the conversation when people shut down men’s rights groups as de facto misogynistic, and now here we are.
Dudes getting divorced and then hating women are really telling on themselves.
He’s right about one thing: There is a serious lack of actual masculinity among our leaders.
Most public figures who try to present some form of “masculinity” are just desperate and petty, willing to sacrifice nothing to earn their status, and eager to degrade others to look better by comparison.
A real man produces more than he needs, but takes only that much and ensures the rest goes to those who are less able to sustain themselves. They protect the defenseless, elevate those who are ignored, and invest in a future they won’t personally live to enjoy.
Show me a real man among you. It’s not femininity keeping you from finding one. It’s your own greed and hubris.
When I was in the military, the best Marines weren't the ones who could lift the most or run the fastest (though sometimes they did), they were the ones who stayed up late writing up their junior Marines for awards, the ones who skipped their own lunch to teach their squad or platoon how to perform better, and just generally the ones who went out of their own way to improve everyone else's well-being around them, and all the while keeping their mouth shut up how much they were doing for everyone else.
Real men are also able to access their emotions, express their needs(both emotional and physical), develop and share empathy, and nurture deep relationships within their community.
Though i would argue none of what either of us said has to do with gender.
Relentlessly locking your own humanity away behind a strong man facade built on shame is one of the biggest reason these fuckers become so hateful and make "manliness" seem like such a putrid prospect.
Either this comment is also misogynistic as all hell, or my mother was very masculine.
Masculinity isn't just for men. Just like femininity isn't just for women. A healthy person has a mix of these qualities, along with many others that we don't tend to align with a specific gender.
When I say "a real man", I don't mean it as an objective assessment to stick a person neatly into one of two piles. That's not how gender works, and it's not how being a person in general works.
What I mean is that if you're indulging in behavior like belittling other people for fun or "cool points", or using your power or physical strength to get what you want, and calling that "being a man", then your idea of manhood is a mirage. If you want to aspire to something based on your male gender identity, aspire to humility, vigilance, and service to others. Those are great qualities that anyone can have, but they're especially important for men if we're gonna have a respectful and productive society.
(Edit: I didn't downvote you btw. I thought your comment was pretty reasonable and mild. But I did wanna take the opportunity to elaborate, because this topic can be complex and emotionally charged. We all have a lot of baggage when it comes to gender, and it's hard on the internet to develop rapport with each other.)
there’s no such thing as a “real man”… it’s all just roles society has placed upon different genders….
A real man produces more than he needs, but takes only that much and ensures the rest goes to those who are less able to sustain themselves.
A big part of the issue is men constantly being told that they are responsible for everything. So this attitude would only make the problem worse.
This is why a positive kind of masculinity also needs to reject patriarchy and capitalism.
“Producing more than you take” doesn’t have to mean money. (Though I did mean money in my original comment, cuz Zuck is a greedy monster.)
Just listening to people more than you demand to be listened to. Doing chores that you know your friends and family hate. Sharing your knowledge. Cooking. Fixing things. There are so many ways you can contribute to your group that don’t take money, and don’t even take much time.
Being financially responsible and helping people when you can is important, don’t get me wrong.
But seeing your worth in purely financial terms is really limiting and unhealthy for the individual, and also tends to create perverse hierarchies inside of families.
I feel like tech and finance bros turn to the right because bad guys who think they're good get tired of being told by educated people that they are objectively bad guys. And instead of changing, they end up seeking spaces that will reward them for being bad guys and will allow them to ignore or disparage those offering valid criticism.
If your values and your behavior doesn't match, you have to either change your behavior or your values.
They're not bad, they're just going on a neanderthal morality purge
I think this is spot on for many
Zuck: "we never let gender play a role in our hiring process."
Also Zuck: "yeah, we need to hire more men."
It's the old "Male is normal, Female is special" logical fallacy, he only wants to hire people who'd get hired under "Normal" circumstances
When I think of masculine energy I sure as hell don't think of Marky Z.
He seems like the type that ever since he was a kid would full on cry and make everything miserable for everyone until they just gave him his way to shut him up.
Steering the helm of a massive advertising company that misleads and manipulates users does not seem masculine to me.
Yeah, a tom of Finland character he certainly is not. Like he's definitely masculine, but more masculine [pejorative] in the vein of a man having a midlife crisis and deciding to get into a sad pantomime of youthful masculinity. He definitely doesn't seem the type to do hard labor to provide for his loved ones or to spend his evenings in a shed tinkering on his projects. His masculinity is not the presence of the traits our society positively associates with men and masculinity or of those that those who are attracted to masculinity find attractive or endearing, but merely a starker absence of the positive traits associated with femininity or neutrality and an absence of the negative traits of femininity.
That over sized black T and gold chain is so absurd. Maybe I don’t follow enough influencers, but when did alt right culture appropriate last decade’s hip hop style?
I cannot think of a bigger cuck move than bending over to court bad faith actors and suckling at king maga's sweaty little man nipples for $$
I hate everything about this comment, but you're not wrong.
You're on a website where people come out of the woodwork to defend "ethical polyamory" and the biggest cuck you can think of is a CEO trying to curry political favor with the current US president?
...., Being poly doesn't make you a cuck
I think what most companies actually need is more QA energy 😅
He knows he'll never make up the loss of subscribers on the left since he's burned those bridges so he has to double down on the far right to carry his platform.
This way he gets to compete with X for a race to the bottom and see who can gather the most shitbags to support their plateauing businesses.
"he has to" does he though? He has enough money for him and his entire lineage to live lavishly for eternity. He can dip out today and stop working forever, relax on a beach, and disconnect from the world like Tom from MySpace did.
He's not being forced to do anything.
Listen to the latest zuck episode of jre and he actually sounds pretty reasonable. I know that's crazy but if you have a couple hours you can actually listen to the dude.
Edit: just to be clear I'm not saying I love the guy, or even like him. But listening to him talk for 2 hours he is atleast semi intelligent and is trying to keep free speech alive.
The rhetoric of the right has shown time and time again that they will use disinformation and misinformation to conform their gullible audience towards whatever views suit their needs. Humanity continues to confirm his remarkable susceptible to this practice. This form of deceitful expression is not the 'free speech' a society should tolerate and why fact checking entities need to exist with the power to shutdown this discourse.
sitting through any length of jre is going to either waste your time or expose you to hours of garbage.
why?
That would mean listening to Joe Rogan, and unfortunately I'd be too busy setting my hair on fire before I ever listened to Joe Rogan.
I actually have listened to Zuckface on a podcast once because I had never heard him talk. He definitely does some good masking as being a human person. And I think if he wasn't evil he might have some interesting ideas, sure.
He doesn't even give off "human" energy.
Does he even give off heat?
He does when his cpu starts to overheat.
I mean yeah he needs to cool his personality emulation chip somehow
The fact that a load of billionaires are now embracing the far right to protect their arses sure seems like a familiar theme.
It’s crazy that they could lose 90% of everything and still have more than 99.999% of the population of the planet, yet they keep fighting to make sure they have more and more and even more.
I think the mistake here is thinking it's about "things" or material objects. Most people interface with money at a basic level: you can buy a new jacket, reliable car, a sizeable home, etc. However, at the level that you are with these billionaires, it's no longer about having things or owning things. It's about having more power to do things.
For example, there's are some fun little calculators where you can calculate all the things that some could spend their money on https://neal.fun/spend/ https://www.spend-elon-fortune.com/
At this point it's an imperialist kind of mindset, where you want to own multiple corporations, properties, and show it off to your wealthy colleagues that you are the best at X. It's probably not unlike how professional athletes will destroy their bodies with steroids to become the best in the world, just the negatives are externalized.
It's a mental illness. They have to have more power, if not money...
I assume by more masculine energy, Zuckerberg means:
- More posturing by Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson and Donald Trump, the US exemplars of manhood.
- Trolls, more trolls, trolls trolling trolls. People fucking with anyone else that makes them uncomfortable.
- People boasting about how rich they are, how fast their car goes, and how many women they bed. Comparisons. Leaderboards.
- Doxing. So much doxing.
- So much AI porn. So much futa AI porn.
- So much misogyny. All the misogygy. Al Misogyny. Misogyny leaderboards.
- Tons of hate speech against the targets of the week. Immigrants, trans folk, Jews Arab Muslims, libs (not liberals, neoliberals or left-wingers, libs )
Essentially Zuck wants Facebook to become 4chan/b... or 4chan/pol, only where everybody knows your name.
Probably. As opposed to what masculine used to mean and should mean:
-
Taking responsibility for your actions
-
Taking leadership if you see nobody else is going to
-
Treating others with respect
Of course, in modern times, we've realized this has nothing to do with masculinity or femininity and rather with one's role in society. If you want to be respectable, these are just some of the things you should be doing.
-
It already is. It's a wasteland of boomer MAGA bullshit. And they all hate him anyway.
Every time I think Zuck is as pathetic as someone can be, he finds a new depth to sink to. Truly an innovator
How to alienate your daughter:
Narcissists don't care about things like that unless it boosts their ego.
Daughter? Sounds like major feminine energy
Become a Musk atear.
maybe you should start with humanoid energy you fucking lizardbot
What a fucking joke, he wouldn't know masculine energy if it roughly penetrated him from behind whilst lovingly whispering in his ear what a good boy he was.
This is dystopia. The people in control of society pushing insane spiritualist cult mentalities to obfuscate their role in a genocidal empire.
I hate this, because the idea comes from Hermetic spirituality, but from a very cherry picked version of it that basically says "Be as shitty a person as you want, give into your natural inclinations and vices"
I know because I've seen this A LOT!
Because the actual Seventh Principle of Hermeticism does not say to do this, it actually says to balance the masculine and feminine within yourself to acknowledge both as being geniunely within you. It also encourages that the two shouldn't be seen as opposites but rather two endpoints on a vast spectrum, the same way we see hot and cold.
But sadly too many "Gurus" somehow warped this into
"Reject femininity, see it as weakness, and be a massive chauvinistic asshole."
When that couldn't be further from what it's saying.
So I watched the entire three hour interview.
Technically speaking, Zuckerberg emphasizes the need for balance. He on multiple times either emphasizes that both men and women should feel comfortable in corporate environments, and explicitly says something like "there has to be a balance" on at least two occasions.
The issue is that other parts of the interview don't really match that idea of balance. Zuckerberg and Rogan spent like a third of the entire interview talking about bro culture stuff. I'm not even talking about "bro culture in the context of corporate America". Rogan spends like a full ten minutes lecturing Zuckerberg on the proper way to bow hunt.
Overall I think the media is focusing outrage bait while ignoring the serious implications of the interview. Zuckerberg is clearly lobbying the Trump administration to prevent meta and other US tech companies from being subject to EU regulatory security. It has serious implications both as a consumer and in terms of geopolitics.
Most companies just need more ppl that actually work rather than doing politics and profiting off of the 30% working personnel.
nah, they just need to fire some useless managers and reroute the pay to the workers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTdOHBIppx8
Maybe, but he's damn sure cucked. Dude 100% has a chair in the corner of his bedroom facing the bed.
What phase of cesar hair-do is he on? Goldy locks?
What even is masculine energy? Is it about being a macho man focused on fat and destruction?
I think what he's saying is that companies have felt insecure about their image (to investors) so they acted performatively woke (=feminine energy), and he feels insecure about his image (to Trump) so he's gonna act performatively manospheric (=masculine energy).
Ahh yes big rat-penis energy from dead mark 💀 🐀
Mark and his rat penis transplant might have other pressing things to think about.
What is this esoteric talk about "energy"?
Last I checked most of the biggest corpos are still run by men from the last generations, with current generations still waiting around for them to die off and take their places. So the only thing Zuckerberg could be talking about is the soulless DEI tokenism corpos do to get public brownie points.
If he isn’t he will after this.
I am speculating that all the ridiculing and questioning Mark Zuckerberg's masculinity over the years made him so insecure that he turned to the manosphere. We only have ourselves to blame.
I have only seen him be referred as a robot, which is fucked up to robots.
Lizards too
He's just sucking up to the people currently in charge, that is all this is
Probably, but he's assuredly been cucked for years.
This kind of thing is an interesting topic. Obviously Zuck is a shit bag but that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm not one to say that men are being repressed or that masculinity is under attack, although I do think elements of both of those things are true if the statements are interpreted in a generous fashion. I've found that people will accept the general statement that men have problems but talking about men's issues in any detail is usually met with scorn. You can say "men have problems like everybody else" and that's generally tolerated but if you say "X Y or Z is a problem for men" then all of a sudden you're misogynistic or otherwise associating yourself with team white male privilege. I see this happen essentially every time the topic comes up. The vibe seems to be "we're dealing with everyone else's problems so we don't have time to listen to your complaints".
People like Jordan Peterson and Andrew Tate have made a career out of listening to those problems. They offer shitty solutions and horrible explanations but they're paying attention and in return they get views from people who don't feel like anyone else is. There are a lot of guys out there doing their best to be good people who need to feel like their problems matter to society. You don't have to abandon the things that are important to you to listen to them. Just commiserate a bit and a lot of them will be happy to listen to your problems in return. That's how empathy is supposed to work.
Zuck is married?!
For over 10 years at least
I hope she takes half his stuff.
New Age Psuedo-religious bullshit
Get ready for him getting born again, or at least get on the "culturally christian" bullshit.
Yeah that seems to be the excuse for why shitty people (like Dawkins) turn even shittier
Divorce and/or testosterone supplementation roting brains
Hah! Imagine all these unregulated supplements causing neurotoxicity, later to be worsened by Trump defunding the FDA.
The FDA is too strong of a brand, they won't defund or eliminate, they'll just replace entire staff with sycophants and lower standards so that all kinds of snake oil (that administration has a "taste" of) becomes "FDA Approved" so the AI can sell it to incels on twitter and facebook. And ultimately when editing is "FDA APPROVED" then NOTHING is FDA Approved. The next 4 - 20 years are going to continue to be a push to break confidence in American institutions, to make America a weaker and weaker player (and a bigger joke) on the international stage. All so that they have less influence in world affairs (I.e. Ukraine, Israel, etc).
The gender identity of your work places energy is not the damn problem. Raise the damn pay. People will work in a sewer if you paid enough.
People working in a sewer should be paid the most.
I think meta pays pretty well
thats what happen when you never ate a pussy
You have to eat it to gain its power!
He's just playing up to Trump and the MAGAts.
I would speculate the opposite. I imagine he always believed this shit but was being politically correct (i.e., saying things to appease the public that he didn't actually believe in)... This is common enough in the tech sector.
(But if course you could be right. Only people who hang out with him would know.)
He's even got the Trump tan
CEO's finding rationale for company poor performace.
Well, he's already divorced from reality
bunch of companies are prioritizing woman and non-straight man while hiring (because its better pr i guess) so hes not wrong
Sure bud it's all the women's fault.
There's two different ways to read the previous poster's point:
- That any kind of quotas system (no mater whose "born with certain genetic traits" group it favours) is generally bad and causes more problem than it solves. From what I've observed in my one and only time working in a place with such quotas, that's what I saw, with both very incompetent people from the favored group who clearly only got the job due to quotas and at the same time with competent members of that group having trouble being taken seriously because they were assumed to be incompetent and having only got the position due to having the genetics that made them be a member of said favored group (they were de facto seen as second class), so in general I would agree that priviledging in hiring anybody due to the genetics they were born with is wrong (not to be confused with systems that try and make sure nobody is discriminated against due to the genetics they were born with, systems I totally agree with: basically I disagree with people being given different treatment when it comes to selection for a professinal occupation due their genetics).
- That women and non-straight men are a problem in that profession. If that's the take, I not only totally disagree with it but find it apalling and unnacceptable. Again, experience tells me that in IT women and non-straight men are neither less nor more competent than straight men: from what I've observed gender and sexual orientation are, as expected, entirelly irrelevant when it comes to professional competent in that domain. One needs to have no clue whatsoever about that domain and be an abnormal simpleton to think gender or sexual orientation is what makes somebody a good or bad professional in any of the various areas of the Industry.
wut
Depends... Marketing, PR and Social Media Management are pretty high on female/diverse staff anyways,.. its more like men feel like women (like reversed roles) in that industry and maybe that scares them. (Lots of sexism, but that goes both ways now)
I work engineering and it's mandatory to completely remove any irrelevant info from the CV (including gender, race..) to screen applicants.
Having lived and worked in both The Netherlands and Britain, I've seen actual American-style quotas systems in Britain that explicitly priviledged a specific gender (rather than what you describe, which is a system meant to remove any and all discrimination, even if subconscious), and the result was pretty bad, both because the worst professionals around there were from that gender and clearly only got the job due to quotas and at the same time competent professionals that happen to have that gender were not taken as seriously and were kinda second class professionals even though they did not at all deserve it.
In fact, that specific place, which is the only one I ever worked in with an American style quota system, was the most sexist place I ever worked in, in my entire career (which spans over 2 decades) - people would not say sexist things (lest HR punish them), all the while they would definitelly have different competence expectations and even levels of how seriously they took people as professionals depending on people's gender. Meanwhile the people that got in via quotas tended to be the kind that would play the system rather than do the job, which often made the whole environment even more sexist.
Interestingly, IT in The Netherlands was way less sexist in a natural way than almost all places I worked in Britain, with almost always more well balanced gender-wise teams and were - at least that I noticed - nobody assuming anything in professional terms based on people's gender or sexual orientation.
Frankly one of the things I really missed after I move to Britain from The Netherlands was exactly the general Dutch viewpoint that "that's about as relevant as eye color" when it came to judging people as professionals based on their gender or sexual orientation.
Maybe the point of the previous poster was about that American-style quotas systems.
Don't worry! Once all the H-1B visas get relaxed, we can push even MORE straight white men out!
Can anyone who upvoted this explain what's actually wrong with Zuck's comment?
"Masculine energy I think is good, and obviously society has plenty of that, but I think that corporate culture was really trying to get away from it [...] It's like you want feminine energy, you want masculine energy [...] I think that that’s all good. But I do think the corporate culture sort of had swung toward being this somewhat more neutered thing,
It's nonsense.
Ok but you can't explain what's wrong with the comment?
It's easy to get offended and think it's wrong, but considering my comment is at +1/-6 yet no one has actually explained what's wrong reinforces my belief it's actually sensible. Something that's obvious nonsense can be debunked with no effort, yet here we are
It has the vibes of run-of-the-mill toxic masculinity trying to categorize behaviors based on gender and then make it subtly clear that only the masculine category is good and acceptable, or in his words, not "neutered".
Or at least that's how I understand the outrage but it doesn't mean that's exactly what he's saying because his statement is plausibly deniable. He needs to clarify (but does he really, given his latest activity around prez Musk & Co.?).
Its ironic because theyre trying to project masculinity without doing anything worth a fuck. If zuck wanted respect he would have done something beneficial with his position like a real man.
